PYA1: Critical Issue Eye Witness Testimony EWT. Eye Witness Testimony EWT The statements provided by witnesses of a crime or situation which help to establish.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reconstruction of Automobile destruction
Advertisements

Loftus and Palmer Leading Questions.
Memory. Watch this clip and answer the following questions qaLrc4.
BIG 12 - Powerpoint #1 Loftus & Palmer 1974; Bartlett 1932.
Write them down Did you note down ‘sweet’ and ‘angry’?
Evaluating Loftus (1979) ‘The weapon effect’
EWT Other Factors that Affect EWT. BARTLETT AND THE EFFECT OF RECONSTRUCTIVE MEMORY. War of the Ghosts Anybody?
Cognitive Approach AS Level Psychology The core studies.
Eye Witness Testimony Objectives 1.Be able to appreciate the importance of memory research 2.Be able to describe the key study 3.Be able to evaluate the.
Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction
Loftus and Palmer Evaluation Cognitive Core Study.
By Dhina, Haneen, Viveka, and Natsuki Elizabeth Loftus.
Loftus & Palmer (1974) - Aim: - To see the effect of leading questions on Eye Witness Testimony.
Eye-witness testimony
Memory – Module 27 Forgetting and Memory Construction Memory – Module 27 Forgetting and Memory Construction General Psych 1 April 12, 2005 Class #21.
LOFTUS AND PALMER CORE STUDY SLIDES Get out your APFC.
Memory part I Memory Distortions Eyewitness Testimony Lineup Studies.
Readings 25 & 26. Reading 25: Classic Memory and the eye-witness Experiment 1 Experiment 2 Conclusion Reading 26: Contemporary Misinformation Effect Memory.
Memory and the power of suggestion
Eyewitness Testimony Reconstructive memory Reconstructive memory Schema driven errors Schema driven errors Effect of leading questions Effect of leading.
PSYA1: Eye Witness Testimony
Eye Witness Identification
Processes That Can Affect the Stages of Memory: Three stages of processing an important event Encoding, Storage and Retrieval Factors that can affect eyewitness.
Reconstruction of Memories Elizabeth Loftus’ Research.
Yuille and Cutshall (1986) A case study of eyewitness memory of a crime.
Reliability of one cognitive process
AS Level Psychology The core studies Cognitive Approach.
AREA OF STUDY 2 MEMORY UNIT 3 THE CONSCIOUS SELF.
Question Wording and Eyewitness Testimony © POSbase 2005 The study of Loftus & Palmer (1974):Loftus & Palmer (1974): Participants viewed films about a.
Memorise these words, you have until I have finished reading them out. sournicecandy honeysugarsoda bitterchocolategood hearttastecake toothtartpie.
Loftus And Palmer The Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction.
Factors affecting eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony Eye witnesses who have ‘seen with their own eyes’ tend to be believed more by juries than.
Do Now What are some factors that you think could influence eyewitness testimony?
Memory Eyewitness Testimony. Learning objectives Understand what is meant by eyewitness testimony (EWT) Be aware of some of the factors that affect the.
MEMORY IN EVERYDAY LIFE MEMORY IN EVERYDAY LIFE Factors Affecting EWT Anxiety.
Eyewitness Testimony Elizabeth Loftus.
Memory – Introduction and Application Three stages of processing an event Encoding Storage Retrieval Factors that can affect memory in these three stages.
AS Level Psychology The core studies
PSY.MemoryRetrieval. The Willpower Instinct Independently read pg. 41 – 45 Explain one theory of memory retrieval. Before answering – do 15 jumping jacks.
Loftus & Palmer Cognitive Psychology The Core Studies.
Eyewitness Testimony Violence and Recall Loftus & Burns: showed participants a filmed bank robbery. One version shots were fired but no one was hurt.
About how fast were the cars going when they hit each other? collided smashed bumped contacted.
Research methods Designing an experiment Lesson 5.
Loftus and Palmer (1974).  Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory  Field of psychology:
Reliability in Memory.  In 1984 Jennifer Thompson, a 22-year-old college student was raped at knifepoint. She testified that during the crime she made.
CLOA: Cultural Factors in Cognition. Difference between Social and Cultural Social A factor which you are born without but not necessarily into Cultural.
Eyewitness Testimony Reliability in Memory.
MEMORY FALLIBLITY OF MEMORY.
Multiple choice questions
Memory Construction “To Some Degree All Memory is False”
Loftus and Palmer (1974) (A2) Reconstruction of automobile destruction and example of the interaction between language and memory.
Reconstructive Memory
Eye Witness Testimony EWT.
Eye Witness Testimony EWT.
4.3 Classic Evidence: Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Reliability of Memory Ms. Carmelitano.
Elizabeth Loftus and John Palmer
PSYA1: Cognitive Psychology Memory
4.3 Classic Evidence: Loftus and Palmer (1974)
Memory – Introduction and Application
Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction
what have we learned from past two lessons?
Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction
Article Analysis Practical
Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction
Sour Nice Candy Honey Pie Toffee Taste Cake Tooth Tart Sugar Pop
L.O: Misleading information leading questions post-event discussion.
The cognitive area.
Eye Witness Testimony EWT.
Presentation transcript:

PYA1: Critical Issue Eye Witness Testimony EWT

Eye Witness Testimony EWT The statements provided by witnesses of a crime or situation which help to establish the facts and often convict criminals. BUT…. Is a person’s memory of an event always accurate? Can anything affect it? Can we help to improve or restore it? Can we rely on it in a court of law?

Reconstructive Memory Bartlett (1932) Memory does not work like a camera! Memory is an active process. We weave in elements of existing knowledge and experience (schemas)

Reconstructive Memory We form these elements into a coherent whole. This means what we actually remember may not be an accurate reproduction of the original stimulus.

Schemas A packet of information about a thing. A cluster of related facts based on previous experiences.

Why do we need schemas? They help us to understand the world and situations. They help us to fill in gaps. They simplify the processing required. Look at p32 of Exploring Psychology – Carmichael et al(1932) The word given conjured up a set of expectations about the object

Look at this picture

Write down a description of what is happening in the picture

Factors that affect reconstructive memory Stereotypes - Allport and Postman (1947) Participants shown a cartoon of a black and a white man on a subway train. Most recalled that the black man had the razor in his hand. The razor was actually in the white man’s hand. (stereotype – more prone to violence). Conclusion: When an actual perceptual fact doesn’t match our expectations, we trust our expectation more than the real situation. We see what we expect to see and this forms the basis for the memory for an event.

Factors that affect reconstructive memory How witnesses are interviewed – leading questions, facial techniques, tone of voice of interview may unintentionally communicate their expectations (what they want to hear).

Eye Witness Testimony Elizabeth Loftus (70’s) Research) Illustrated the reconstructive nature of memory. Star Study: Loftus and Palmer (1974)

The role of misleading questions? In her research Loftus showed that memories can be affected by the wording of questions. A leading question is a question about an event that is phrased in such a way as to prompt a particular answer. Information is provided in the question (i.e. after the event) which may distort the accuracy of the memory.

Do people believe EWT’s? One study by Loftus (1974) shows that people tend to believe a suspect is guilty if there is an eyewitness. So it is very important that psychologists find out why EWT is inaccurate and how to improve accuracy.

Star Study: Loftus and Palmer (1974) Aim: To investigate the accuracy of memory for a car accident and to see whether leading questions affect accuracy. Procedure: Showed films of traffic accidents to 45 participants, then answered a series of questions about what they had seen. Participants divided into 5 groups – all filled in same questionnaire apart from on critical question* which was different for each group relating to estimate of speed when cars ‘hit’ (smashed into, collided with, bumped into, contacted) each other. Mean speed calculated for each group. * About how fast were the cars going when they ….. each other?

Loftus and Palmer (74) Read about this classic research on p 33 of Exploring Psychology Draw a graph of the results in tables 2.1 and 2.2. What conclusion can be drawn from this research? What does is suggest about the accuracy of EWT? Any problems with this piece of research?

Star Study: Loftus and Palmer (1974) Findings: The mean speed varied significantly between groups. ‘smashed’ – approx 41mph, ‘collided’ – approx 40mph, ‘bumped’ – approx 38mph, ‘ ‘hit’ – approx 34mph, ‘contacted’ – approx 32mph Conclusion: The wording of a question can affect the accuracy of the answer.

Star Study: Loftus and Palmer (1974) Criticisms: Loftus has made a huge contribution to our understanding of EWT and her research is rigorous.  Participants all students – not a repesentative sample.  They might have guessed what was expected – demand characteristics.  People were expecting to witness a car accident. In real life an accident is unexpected.  Real eyewitnesses are likely to be emotionally affected and know their testimony could have serious consequences. (Foster et al (1994) – witnesses more accurate in recalling memory of a bank robbery when they were led to believe their testimony would influence a real trial.)

Other research by Loftus et al Loftus and Zanni (1975) – Showed 2 groups a film of a car accident. More participants remembered a non-existent broken headlight in the group that were asked – ‘Did you see the broken headlight?’, rather than ‘Did you see a broken headlight?’ A criticism of these types of studies is that they are artificial.